Does anyone have any experience with the new Regal GS? I sold my car yesterday and I am seriously considering one. The only problem I have with it is that it is a Buick. I have it between a barely used Audi A4 and a new Regal GS. I'm leaning towards the Regal because you seem to get about 80% of the performance of an S4 (which is my favorite car) for about 80% of the price of an A4....I just can't seem to totally sell myself on the idea of a Buick though. I realize there are other cars in this segment, but I live in cold winters and need either FWD or AWD, four doors, enough room for two car seats, I much prefer a manual transmission, and I drive a little more than 60 miles per day so MPG's are important.

Another ugly cookie cutter point A to B econobox no different than most other cars on the market. I'm not a Chevy guy but if you're interested in a Regal why not a get an '80s Regal, Grand National, Monte Carlo, or other of the same body style/chassis? They were one of the last nice looking and fairly well built cars made. As for no RWD in the snow, that nonsense. I've always driver RWD in the snow and my old cars go through snow a lot better than new cookie cutter FWD cars. Heck, even in my truck I very rarely have to lock the hubs in the snow... Only if I want to get out of the driveway without shoveling.

Thats a really sharp looking car for sure. I like that Buick is changing it up and trying to change their stigma of an "old persons car". They probably should have given that more of a run when they still had Tiger but its never to late to make a change for the better.

I'm not a Chevy guy but if you're interested in a Regal why not a get an '80s Regal, Grand National, Monte Carlo, or other of the same body style/chassis? They were one of the last nice looking and fairly well built cars made.

I look at it the same way many (most?) of us look at buying a boat... If you can afford $27k for a new car you can afford the gas for it.

Aside from that, I'll make a disclaimer that I'm not a GM guy, but I don't see any reason an '80s Regal/Monte Carlo/Grand National couldn't get similar MPG to the new Regal. New Regal looks like 19/31 MPG. Compact cars in 1960 were getting over 32 MPG highway. Full size cars today are getting mid-high teens city and mid teens highway. With a fuel economy build and a modern 5 speed (or 4 speed slushbox even), there's no reason a midsize 80s car shouldn't be able to get at least high 20s to low 30s on the highway with a small block or forced induction 6 cylinder, and have a buttload more power and style than a new econobox.

Also remember MPG is a game of diminishing returns. My truck gets 10.8 MPG towing my boat. If I tweak the jetting and tuning curve and manage to squeeze 1 more MPG out of it, for 11.8 MPG it will make a big difference in my fuel expenses. If I'm riding my bike, which gets about 42 MPG, and manage to make some similar jetting and timing tweaks to get 1 more MPG for 43 MPG... I probably won't even notice the difference. For example, 10.8 vs 11.8 MPG over 1200 miles, one month of driving in this case, is $33.90 in savings. 42 vs 43 MPG over the same miles is a $2.39 saving.

Even if you're driving an old big block car getting 16 MPG (my '68 Galaxie with a low compression 460 and 3 speed slushbox gets 16 MPG highway at 70 MPH), when comparing to spending $27k on a new car you're looking at 248,000 miles before you break even when considering current gas prices. That's over 17 years to start saving money! Figure on $5/gallon gas like the media says and it's still 179,000 miles or well over 12 years before breaking even.

Those time frames get longer if you figure paying interest on a loan if you don't pay cash. As I said, if you can afford a new car you can afford to put gas in it. There is no money to be saved in buying a new car to spend less on gas. If you're really worried about saving money on transportation you need to look at an old compact car or a motorcycle.